Doe v. Zucker

DECISION and ORDER  Currently pending before the Court, in this discrimination action filed by John Doe (“Petitioner”) against Howard Zucker, M.D., and Anne Marie T. Sullivan (“Respondents”) and Ruth Rivera, George Iwczenko, and Eric Scoff (“Intervener-Respondents”) are the following two motions: (1) Petitioner’s motion to dismiss the Intervener-Respondents from this action; and (2) Petitioner’s motion for a preliminary injunction enjoining enforcement of the challenged regulations. (Dkt. Nos. 64, 65.) For the reasons set forth below, Petitioner’s motion to dismiss the Intervener-Respondents is denied and Petitioner’s motion for a preliminary injunction is denied.I. RELEVANT BACKGROUNDA. Summary of Petitioner’s ComplaintOn July 20, 2018, this Court issued a Decision and Order granting Respondents’ motion to dismiss Petitioner’s Complaint in part and denying it in part. (Dkt. No. 51 [Decision and Order filed July 20, 2018].) As a result of that Decision and Order, Petitioner’s Fourth and Fifth Claims were dismissed, while his First, Second, Third, and Sixth Claims were permitted to proceed. (Id.)As to the First Claim, Petitioner alleges that the challenged regulations violate the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) by (a) depriving persons of their choice to live in an adult home solely because of their disability, (b) forcing persons with mental disabilities to accept a residence other than the adult home of their choice, and (c) forcing persons with mental disabilities in hospitals, nursing homes, or other shelters to remain in living situations unsuited for them by reason of their mental disability. (Dkt. No. 2, at